A recent forest carbon study assessed several active world-wide standards for forest management, social, environmental and carbon in relation for REDD. To evaluate that, the scientists used a framework envolving six criterias, ranging from poverty allevation to assessment of net greenhouse gas (GHG).
For some reader like me, the evaluation result indicates the best forest carbon standards for REDD mechanism.
Here some standards that currently active in the world:
Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB), CCB REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (CCBA REDD+ S&E), CarbonFix Standard (CFS), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Global Conservation Standard (GCS), ISO 14064:2006, Plan Vivo Standard, Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), SOCIALCARBON Standard and the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS).
Here the complete criteria used by the author: (1) poverty alleviation, (2) sustainable management of forests (SMF), (3) biodiversity protection, (4) quantification and assessment of net greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits; and two procedural criteria: (5) monitoring and reporting, and (6) certification procedures.
As we notice that REDD programs require assessment of GHG benefits, monitoring, reporting and certification.
The authors analysis shows that only the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) treats these three criteria comprehensively. No standard provides comprehensive coverage of the social and other environmental criteria. FSC, PEFC and CarbonFix provide comprehensive assessments of the sustainable forest management criterion. CCBA REDD+ S&E, CCB, and GCS provide comprehensive coverage of the biodiversity and poverty alleviation criteria.
Last year, a REDD methodology proposal was submitted to VCS. It included the quantification of carbon accounting procedure.
According to the study, experience in using these standards in pilot projects shows that projects are currently combining several standards as part of their strategy to improve their ability to attract investment. However, by using several standards, it would implies to the costs. Hmm…I remember, some people agreed that REDD is cheap solution for global warming.
The authors conclude that voluntary certification provides useful practical experience that should feed into the design of the international REDD+ regime.
Find the complete publication at Forest:
Merger, Eduard; Dutschke, Michael; Verchot, Louis. 2011. “Options for REDD+ Voluntary Certification to Ensure Net GHG Benefits, Poverty Alleviation, Sustainable Management of Forests and Biodiversity Conservation.” Forests 2, no. 2: 550-577.